Open Access

Impact of sampling techniques on the concentration of ammonia and sulfide in pore water of marine sediments

Aleksandra Brodecka-Goluch

Aleksandra Brodecka-Goluch

University of Gdańsk, Faculty of Oceanography and Geography, Institute of Oceanography, Department of Marine Chemistry and Environmental Protection, Al. M. PiłsudskiegoGdynia, Poland
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Brodecka-Goluch, Aleksandra
, 
Patrycja Siudek

Patrycja Siudek

National Marine Fisheries Research Institute (NMFRI), ul. KołłątajaGdynia, Poland
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Siudek, Patrycja
 and 
Jerzy Bolałek

Jerzy Bolałek

University of Gdańsk, Faculty of Oceanography and Geography, Institute of Oceanography, Department of Marine Chemistry and Environmental Protection, Al. M. PiłsudskiegoGdynia, Poland
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Bolałek, Jerzy
  
Jun 03, 2019
Impact of sampling techniques on the concentration of ammonia and sulfide in pore water of marine sediments's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Download Cover
Article Category: Original research paper
Published Online: Jun 03, 2019
Page range: 184 - 195
Received: May 25, 2018
Accepted: Nov 09, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ohs-2019-0017
Keywords
© 2019 Faculty of Oceanography and Geography, University of Gdańsk, Poland
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Profiles of ammonia concentration obtained for three methods of pore water sampling (a – rhizon samplers; b– centrifugation of sediment subsamples collected using syringes; c– centrifugation of sediment sections pushed out of core liners). In the case of Method II, concentration values for cores 5 and 6 were interpolated, and in the case of Method III, concentrations for each sediment layer are given for a sediment depth from the middle of a layer.
Profiles of ammonia concentration obtained for three methods of pore water sampling (a – rhizon samplers; b– centrifugation of sediment subsamples collected using syringes; c– centrifugation of sediment sections pushed out of core liners). In the case of Method II, concentration values for cores 5 and 6 were interpolated, and in the case of Method III, concentrations for each sediment layer are given for a sediment depth from the middle of a layer.

Figure 2

Profiles of sulfide concentration obtained by three methods of pore water sampling (a – rhizon samplers; b – centrifugation of sediment subsamples collected using syringes; c – centrifugation of sediment sections pushed out of core liners). In the case of Method II, concentration values for cores 5 and 6 were interpolated, and in the case of Method III, concentrations for each sediment layer are given for a sediment depth from the middle of a layer.
Profiles of sulfide concentration obtained by three methods of pore water sampling (a – rhizon samplers; b – centrifugation of sediment subsamples collected using syringes; c – centrifugation of sediment sections pushed out of core liners). In the case of Method II, concentration values for cores 5 and 6 were interpolated, and in the case of Method III, concentrations for each sediment layer are given for a sediment depth from the middle of a layer.

Figure 3

Profiles of the average ammonium concentration for three methods of pore water sampling (Method I – rhizon samplers, Method II – centrifugation of sediment subsamples, Method III – centrifugation of sediment sections). In the case of Method III, concentrations were averaged to obtain values for depths of 5, 10, 15 cm etc.
Profiles of the average ammonium concentration for three methods of pore water sampling (Method I – rhizon samplers, Method II – centrifugation of sediment subsamples, Method III – centrifugation of sediment sections). In the case of Method III, concentrations were averaged to obtain values for depths of 5, 10, 15 cm etc.

Figure 4

Profiles of average sulfide concentration for three methods of pore water sampling (Method I – rhizon samplers, Method II – centrifugation of sediment subsamples, Method III – centrifugation of sediment sections). In the case of Method III, concentrations were averaged to obtain values for depths of 5, 10, 15 cm etc.
Profiles of average sulfide concentration for three methods of pore water sampling (Method I – rhizon samplers, Method II – centrifugation of sediment subsamples, Method III – centrifugation of sediment sections). In the case of Method III, concentrations were averaged to obtain values for depths of 5, 10, 15 cm etc.

Summary of factors associated with the applied pore water extraction methods

Factor Method I (rhizon samplers) Method II (centrifugation of sediment subsamples collected using syringes) Method III (centrifugation of sediment sections pushed out of a core liner)
centrifugation – + +
contact with atmospheric air – +/– +
core disturbance – – +
filtration + – –

General information on the sampling station

Station ID EXP–1
Location 54°37'N;18°59'E
Water depth 85 m
Bottom water salinity 10.4 PSU
Bottom water temperature 5.9°C
Type of sediment silt
Corg content in layer 0–1 cm 7–8 % wt. *
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Chemistry, Chemistry, other, Geosciences, Geosciences, other, Life Sciences, Life Sciences, other
Journal RSS Feed